Victor's Rotrex Supercharger Kit - Group Buy?
09-21-2012, 09:29 PM
#76
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Michigan... Grand Rapids
Posts: 758
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
OK.. one last quick post.
Greg, since when is an s4 12:1 comp ????? Idk about yours, but my car came with 10:1, even the GT is 10:1, Also I run 93 octane, it's available at every station in Michigan.
We all know you build a great stroker engine, and are a great mechanic!! No one is doubting your abilities or that your cars aren't very powerful and fast. If I remember correctly everyone pretty much agrees you will spank us OK.
Mikes thread has been totally hijacked, so let it go.
Greg, since when is an s4 12:1 comp ????? Idk about yours, but my car came with 10:1, even the GT is 10:1, Also I run 93 octane, it's available at every station in Michigan.
We all know you build a great stroker engine, and are a great mechanic!! No one is doubting your abilities or that your cars aren't very powerful and fast. If I remember correctly everyone pretty much agrees you will spank us OK.
Mikes thread has been totally hijacked, so let it go.
09-21-2012, 09:35 PM
#77
Rennlist Member
I hadn't previously focused on the "before" numbers, but this is interesting. An RMB with a stock exhaust is net-zero for added hp, so the only power-adder was 24# injectors and Sharktuning. And power in that configuration was 326 rwhp. A stock S4 will be right around 270 rwhp, so the 24# injectors and Sharktuning is worth another 56 rwhp-- a whopping 21% increase.
That's terrific, and a lot more from injectors and Sharktuning than I think anyone would have guessed, including me. That also confirms what a great investment a Sharktuner is, at only a fraction of the cost of a S/C setup. For more info see http://JDSporsche.com or my website at http://siriuscyber.net/sharktuner.
We can also extrapolate this back to a completely stock car without Sharktuning, compared to a Rotrex setup with standard "safe" tune. Victor's 481 rwhp (from the dyno sheet) compared to 326 (also from the sheet) is +48%, and applying that to a completely stock car at 270 rwhp would be 398 rwhp. That's pretty sweet also!
Cheers,
That's terrific, and a lot more from injectors and Sharktuning than I think anyone would have guessed, including me. That also confirms what a great investment a Sharktuner is, at only a fraction of the cost of a S/C setup. For more info see http://JDSporsche.com or my website at http://siriuscyber.net/sharktuner.
We can also extrapolate this back to a completely stock car without Sharktuning, compared to a Rotrex setup with standard "safe" tune. Victor's 481 rwhp (from the dyno sheet) compared to 326 (also from the sheet) is +48%, and applying that to a completely stock car at 270 rwhp would be 398 rwhp. That's pretty sweet also!
Cheers,
Ya..like I said, and you noticed my trip up there, Im dynoing 285 with tune, and have the 19lb injectors maxed out well before the car COULD make peak power.
09-21-2012, 09:37 PM
#78
Rennlist Member
Ive got limited data on ****ty fuel maps, and MAF Boot issues.
I plan to be down your way the full week before SF12. Will ship you a large box of LSD bits when I get home Monday as well.
Stopping by Ott's tomorrow here in Oregon on the way home too.
09-21-2012, 09:43 PM
#80
Rennlist Member
To start with, my following thoughts do no apply to Todd. What he is doing, with "alternative" fuel is completely different.
Find me a supercharged 928 engine (with stock internals) that can make 2 laps at Willow Springs, at WOT, and I'll change my entire thought process....until then, everyone is simply installing the fuse to a grenade.
No automotive company (that I'm aware of) has ever offered a supercharged engine that made anywhere near 6 lbs. of boost, which started at 12 to 1 compression. The reason why? It simply will not stay together, when put into the "hands" of the public. Yes, it might work for the occasional "blast" through a couple of gears....but it isn't going to "work", once the engine approaches "thermal equilibrium."
I have read all the horsepower claims anyone will ever be able to "dream" up....they mean nothing to me. "Bench Racing Bull****", as far as I'm concerned. I've spent my entire life around internal combustion engines....I've heard every story, on the planet and then a couple.
481hp with 6 lbs of boost, on street fuel, falls into the "couple" category.
I'd be amazed if it really makes 381!
I do know how to find out....Let's run one right next to a known output engine and compare apples with apples.
Hell, I'm "spotting" you guys over 100hp, at the rear wheels and offering to run you heads up!
I should be asking for "two and the move".....
Bring a car and some money...let's rock and roll!
Find me a supercharged 928 engine (with stock internals) that can make 2 laps at Willow Springs, at WOT, and I'll change my entire thought process....until then, everyone is simply installing the fuse to a grenade.
No automotive company (that I'm aware of) has ever offered a supercharged engine that made anywhere near 6 lbs. of boost, which started at 12 to 1 compression. The reason why? It simply will not stay together, when put into the "hands" of the public. Yes, it might work for the occasional "blast" through a couple of gears....but it isn't going to "work", once the engine approaches "thermal equilibrium."
I have read all the horsepower claims anyone will ever be able to "dream" up....they mean nothing to me. "Bench Racing Bull****", as far as I'm concerned. I've spent my entire life around internal combustion engines....I've heard every story, on the planet and then a couple.
481hp with 6 lbs of boost, on street fuel, falls into the "couple" category.
I'd be amazed if it really makes 381!
I do know how to find out....Let's run one right next to a known output engine and compare apples with apples.
Hell, I'm "spotting" you guys over 100hp, at the rear wheels and offering to run you heads up!
I should be asking for "two and the move".....
Bring a car and some money...let's rock and roll!
To be clear..Im just the west coast victim here..entirely 'dont care' about it.
I WILL have a stroker in a few short years, just this route was more funner..now..whilst I save up. The 'mission statement' is just "a little more, in very short bursts, in my commuter car". Not "beat ****, whip it hard, yee-hawwww....
09-21-2012, 09:48 PM
#82
Rennlist Member
..and that's me. Seven-eight seconds, before the next traffic issue.
Dont make it sound like a _bad thing_..unless you're building strokers on payment plans. Then you can make me feel bad for not throwing 40k at the problem.
09-21-2012, 09:50 PM
#83
Rennlist Member
Ya..well before he can work on mine, I need a signed statement of confidentiality based on the result of the PO's work, and my work combined.
Im not perfect, but..the PO was likely a pack of monkeys working on the car in the Harbor Freight parking lot.
09-21-2012, 09:52 PM
#84
Three Wheelin'
Same here. I would LOVE a monster stroker. But it's not in the cards for me anytime soon.
09-21-2012, 10:39 PM
#87
Three Wheelin'
Well, they don't use that setup anymore now do they?
Also, not many street cars as far as I know spin to almost 20k and have pneumatic valve-springs....
Besides, if we're gonna go there, the fastest accelerating cars on the PLANET are Nitro-huffing, LARGE Displacement, supercharged Top Fuel Dragsters. F1 ain't got nothing on those things as far as acceleration goes.
Also, not many street cars as far as I know spin to almost 20k and have pneumatic valve-springs....
Besides, if we're gonna go there, the fastest accelerating cars on the PLANET are Nitro-huffing, LARGE Displacement, supercharged Top Fuel Dragsters. F1 ain't got nothing on those things as far as acceleration goes.
09-22-2012, 12:45 AM
#88
Former Sponsor
OK.. one last quick post.
Greg, since when is an s4 12:1 comp ????? Idk about yours, but my car came with 10:1, even the GT is 10:1, Also I run 93 octane, it's available at every station in Michigan.
We all know you build a great stroker engine, and are a great mechanic!! No one is doubting your abilities or that your cars aren't very powerful and fast. If I remember correctly everyone pretty much agrees you will spank us OK.
Mikes thread has been totally hijacked, so let it go.
Greg, since when is an s4 12:1 comp ????? Idk about yours, but my car came with 10:1, even the GT is 10:1, Also I run 93 octane, it's available at every station in Michigan.
We all know you build a great stroker engine, and are a great mechanic!! No one is doubting your abilities or that your cars aren't very powerful and fast. If I remember correctly everyone pretty much agrees you will spank us OK.
Mikes thread has been totally hijacked, so let it go.
Sorry. Everyone can now return to Dreamland.
09-22-2012, 12:57 AM
#89
Advanced
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, they don't use that setup anymore now do they?
Also, not many street cars as far as I know spin to almost 20k and have pneumatic valve-springs....
Besides, if we're gonna go there, the fastest accelerating cars on the PLANET are Nitro-huffing, LARGE Displacement, supercharged Top Fuel Dragsters. F1 ain't got nothing on those things as far as acceleration goes.
Also, not many street cars as far as I know spin to almost 20k and have pneumatic valve-springs....
Besides, if we're gonna go there, the fastest accelerating cars on the PLANET are Nitro-huffing, LARGE Displacement, supercharged Top Fuel Dragsters. F1 ain't got nothing on those things as far as acceleration goes.
My comment was relative to displacement. My initial comment is still valid. One can get 1000+ on low displacement while many 400+ c.u. engines have put put less than 4001 ponies throughout the years. This thread in as well as Todd's beast demonstrate my assertion (that MANY other factors trump displacement in the battle for speed). The simplest analogy would be a 200 mph 1000 cc motorcycle. It becomes obvious from this that weight is more important in the equation as well.